William Lane Craig
A comparison of how Jesus is described in the New Testament and in the Qur’an in order to determine which is more reliable.
Jesus of Nazareth is the most influential person who ever lived. Twenty centuries after his death, he continues to exert his power of fascination over the minds of thinking men and women. Peter Jennings’ television special “In Search of Jesus” attracted some 16 million viewers across the country. Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ” grossed 370 million dollars. Dan Brown’s book The DaVinci Code has been a runaway best seller, exceeding the 100 million mark in some 40 languages. People obviously continue to be fascinated by Jesus.
But who is Jesus really? Is he, as the Bible says, the divine Son of God? Or was he merely a human prophet, as Muslims have been taught to believe? Who is the real Jesus?
I propose to answer that question as a historian. I shall look at the New Testament and the Qur’an as the historian looks at any other sources for ancient history. I shall not treat them as inspired or holy books. Accordingly, I shall not require them to be inerrant or infallible in order to be valuable historical sources. By taking this historical approach, we prevent the discussion from degenerating into arguments over Bible difficulties or Qur’anic inconsistencies. The question is not whether the sources are inerrant but whether they allow us to discover who the historical Jesus really was.
Now in order to determine who the historical Jesus really was, we need to have some objective criteria for assessing our sources. Prof. John Meier, an eminent New Testament historian, lists the following four criteria: 1
1. Multiple, independent sources. Events which are reported by independent, and especially early, sources are likely to be historical.
2. Dissimilarity. If a saying or event is different from prior Judaism and also from later Christianity, then it probably doesn’t derive from either one and so belongs to the historical Jesus.
3. Embarrassment. Sayings or events that would have been embarrassing or difficult for the Christian church are unlikely to have been invented and so are likely historical.
4. Rejection and execution. Jesus’ crucifixion is so indisputably established as an anchor point in history that words and deeds of Jesus must be assessed in terms of their likelihood of leading to his execution as “King of the Jews.” A bland Jesus who just preached monotheism would never have provoked such opposition.
When we apply such criteria to the New Testament, we’re able to establish a good deal about the historical Jesus. Let me discuss just three of the facts that emerge about this remarkable man.
It would be interesting to hear Dr. Craig, or any first-rate apologist, offer an explanation as to "why" God would allow an open door for false religions to sweep the globe or, at the very least, have a major regional impact.
ReplyDeleteOf course, the glaring result of such tragedies is that a lot of people are heading straight to hell. Up to now, I've noticed that the question of, "Why would God allow so much evil in the world, if He existed?" dominates the curiosity and objections of nonbelievers, but I've never see much attention or explanation paid to this question.
In my own mind, Matthew, Chapter 7:21-23 applies to Muslims, false Christians, and the other false religions, and then there is the "Doctrine of Election" to consider. The latter an unresolved mystery to me, when I think of all the appeals openly made to accept Christ that fill Scripture. Even such great pastors like Dr. John MacArthur admit that he's not sure exactly how to resolve it. I hope I'm not misrepresenting him.
It's estimated that 25 to 33 percent of the world's 7 billion people claim to be Christians, so Matthew 7:21-23 appears to be holding true, if one considers one out of four, or one out of three to equal, "Not every one that saith unto me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. - Matt 7:21.
Anyway, Pastor J., it might be very interesting to hear your take on why God would allow the thriving of false religions. I can safely bet that I'm not the only lay-Christian who would be interested in hearing such an expert opinion. How about it? Can you put something on your site concerning such an answer, or make a video about it? I can always threaten to stop hogging this message board if you refuse. I'm sure that will alarm you and other poor souls who, for whatever insane reason, actually read my posts. Your response, or lack of one, will clue me in as to if you actually read this board.
Now, please forgive me, I have a cat to kick, kids to beat, and a wife to abuse. Smile.
P.S. I have often been ignored or downright rejected in my life, but, as you can tell, it has no affect on me. When I see God and He says, "Well, you didn't do much," I will reply, "Not so! I contributed to Pastor J's website." I'm not about to let Him get the upper hand on me! Lol.